Saturday, 9 February 2013

Clarembald


Clarembald [Clarembaldus/Clarembertus], a Norman secular priest, with the reputation of being a hugely dissolute person, and previously Prior of Montacute and St. Mary's, Thetford, in 1161, was foisted upon the monks of St. Augustine's Abbey, Canterbury, by King Henry II as their abbot. They did not want him. St. Augustine's was perhaps the oldest and most famous monastic establishment in the whole of the country, having been founded by St. Augustine himself.  It was also one of the richest institutions in the country. Its head was one of the few "Mitred Abbots" of England, an appointment equivalent in rank to a bishop, a baron, with the right to be summoned and sit in the king's Concilium Magnum, as a Lord Spiritual, to give him counsel in the matters of import in regard to the running of the kingdom. Clarembald wanted the riches of the Abbey for his own personal use and profit. The monks of St. Augustine's were very angry with the king about this, and refused to allow Clarembald to enter their chapter-house, celebrate mass, or undertake any other sacred function in their church. But he still managed to have control of the whole temporalities  of the monastery and its land and produce, having obtained the custody of the monastery's common seal.

Clarembald claimed and asserted, as some of his predecessors had also done before him, that the post of Abbot of  St. Augustine's was exempt from archiepiscopal jurisdiction. He demanded that Becket should therefore come to grant him the customary pastoral benediction and blessing for the appointment within the precincts his own monastery, and not for him to have to go to the cathedral, and also without the need to profer any oath of canonical obedience to the archbishop. Becket refused to do this. It was said that the king had encouraged Clarembald in this matter in revenge for Becket's opposition to him. And this has been recorded in the-then contemporary mansucripts as one of the first major causes of dissension between the king and Becket. 

Later on, at the time of Becket's murder Clarembald had offered accommodation to the four knights, on the night before the murder.

Clarembald was never made full abbot, never confirmed in his position and for the next 15 years remained only as abbot-elect, during which time it was said that he wasted the property of the community. In 1168 there had been a major, and the abbey had burned down. According to one account Clarembald had fathered no less than seventeen bastards on one of the monastery’s manors, contrary to the principle of clerical celibacy. In 1173 he was formally deposed, following an investigation that had been set up by the pope at the behest of the monks of the abbey.

Footnote and Aftermath [Link]

Abbot Clarembald appears neither to have received benediction nor to have made profession, his own peculiar position and the strained relations between the king and Becket doubtless accounting for this; His successor, Roger, however, practically secured the victory. The archbishop rejected his claim to be blessed in the abbey with only a modified form of the oath of profession, and the matter was decided by Pope Alexander III, before whom Roger appeared in person. The forged privilegium of Augustine and other documents were produced and declared to be genuine by the pope, who ruled that the archbishops should give benediction in the abbey without any profession of obedience, and that failing this the abbots should go to receive benediction from the pope. He himself blessed Roger in 1179, and moreover granted him permission to wear the mitre and other insignia, a right which the abbots since Egelsin had dropped on account of the opposition of the archbishops. There is no doubt about the matter, for it is admitted by the cathedral party, Gervase bitterly lamenting that not even lavish expenditure of money had availed to prevent it. A formal agreement was made between the abbot and the archbishop in 1182,  and in 1185 Archbishop Baldwin was amicably and respectfully received at the abbey. 

References

Editor W.
A History of the County of Kent: Volume 2 (pp. 126-133).
Houses of Benedictine monks - The abbey of St Augustine, Canterbury 
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=38191

James CRAIGIE ROBERSTON (1859). Becket, archbishop of Canterbury: A. Biography. John Murray. pp. 94–.
James CRAIGIE ROBERSTON (1859). Becket, archbishop of Canterbury: A. Biography. John Murray. pp. 332–4.
Other links

John Morris (1859). The life and martyrdom of saint Thomas Becket archb. of Canterbury. Longman, Brown. pp. 235–.

James J. Spigelman (1 June 2004). Becket & Henry: The Becket Lectures. James Spigelman. pp. 122–. ISBN 978-0-646-43477-3.
James J. Spigelman (1 June 2004). Becket & Henry: The Becket Lectures. James Spigelman. pp. 287–. ISBN 978-0-646-43477-3

William E. Phipps (10 September 2004). Clerical Celibacy: The Heritage. Continuum International Publishing Group. pp. 138–. ISBN 978-0-8264-1617-9.

Henry Charles Lea (1 August 2003). History of Sacerdotal Celibacy in the Christian Church. Kessinger Publishing. pp. 234–. ISBN 978-0-7661-7337-8. 


http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=38191
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=63693

St Augustine's Abbey - Wikipedia

House of Lords - Wikipedia

















Edward
Churton (1840). The
early English church.
J. Burns.




















David
Knowles; C. N. L. Brooke; Vera C. M. London (9 August 2001). The
Heads of Religious Houses: England and Wales, I 940-1216.
Cambridge University Press. pp. 36–. ISBN 978-1-139-43074-6.









William Thorne; Thomas Sprott (1934). William Thorne's Chronicle of Saint Augustine's abbey, Canterbury. B. Blackwell.
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2853901?uid=3738928&uid=2&uid=4&sid=21101771594687
Translation of William Thorne's Chronicle of St. Augustine's Abbey, Canterbury [specimen Pages.]. s.n., 193. http://books.google.com/books?id=9XKAQwAACAAJ.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?ei=uUsTUYTfKaSE4ATYoIGgBw&id=3ZtlAAAAMAAJ&dq=thorne+augustine&q=clarembald#search_anchor

http://archive.org/stream/historiaeanglica00twys#page/n952/mode/1up
http://archive.org/stream/historiaeanglica00twys#page/n983/mode/1upSelden (1652). Historiae Anglicanae Scriptores X. Siméon monachus Dunelmensis, Johannes Prior Hagustaldensis, Ricardus Prior Hagustaldensis, Ailredus Abbas Rievallensis, Radulphus de Diceto Londoniensis, Johannes Brompton Jornallensis, Gervasius Monachus Dorobornensis, Thomas Stubbs Dominicanus, Guilielmus Thorn Cantuariensis, Henricus Knighton Leicestrensis Ex vetustis manuscriptis, nunc primum in lucem editi, adjectis variis lectionibus glossario indiceque copioso. typis Jacobi Flesher, sumptibus Cornelii Bee. pp. 1835–.



http://archive.org/details/monasticonanglic00dugd

Gervase
Historiae anglicanae scriptores X. Simeon monac...

Joseph Berington (1790). The history of the reign of Henry the Second, and of Richard and John, his sons: with the events of the period, from 1154-1216. In which the character of Thomas a Becket is vindicated from the attacks of George, lord Lyttelton ...
. Printed by M. Swinney. pp. 232–.Becket letters
fds.oup.com-www.oup.com-pdf-13-9780198222651.pdf
http://archive.org/stream/historiaeanglica02sime#page/n75/mode/1up

Diceto Clarembald, abbot of, i. 308, 354 ; ii. 279. 




38 Herb i  31
Gervase 1382 































Letter 67. Archbishop Theobald to  Pope Adrian IV



Begging Pope Adrian to command that  the Abbot of St. Augustine's to make a profession of obedience to him.







1165







In a letter dated from Montpelier July 10, 1165, Alexander III ordered Clarembald to make his profession



of obedience to Thomas







Jaffé Regesta 11217




Antecessorum nostrorum









Jacques-Paul Migne (1855). Patrologiae Cursus Completus: Series Latina:  Volume 200 Epistola CCCLIX: excudebat Migne. col. 383.







1168





11392 (7604) Henrico, Anglorum regi, significat, litteras eius a Clarembaldo electo S. Augustini, Reginaldo archidiacono Sarisberiensi, Simone de Carcere, Henrico de Northamtune redditas sibi esse. Thomae, archiepiscopo Cantuariensi, interdictum esse, "ne in regem aut in terram eius vel in personas regni eius, interdicti seu excom- municationis sententiam, donec rex eum in gratiam reciperet, proferre ulla ratione attentaret, aut in aliquo gravare praesumeret" quoniam inquit "litteras illas, quas anno praeterito per nuncios tuos ultimo destinavimus (ep. 11302 d. d. 20. Dec. 1166), viribus de cetero constat carere, si archiepiscopus interim te aut terram tuam vel personas regni in aliquo gravare praesumpserit, praesentes litteras poteris in argumentum nostrae voluntatis ostendere". Quam rex "in scriptis suis vel legatis varietatem invenerit", excusat. (Mense Maio a. 1168 datam esse epistolam hanc, probat Reuter U. 620 sq.) Epist. S. Thomae ed. Lupus p. 630, ed. Giles II. 128, Migne 200 p. 464. "Excellentiae tuae nuncios". 







1176







Clarembald was removed by Alexander III in 1176.



See John of Salisbury  Giles Letter 310







John (of Salisbury, Bishop of Chartres) (1848). Joannis Saresberiensis opera omnia. Nunc primum in unum collegit et cum codicibus manuscriptis: Epistolae.  Epistola CCCX: J. H. Parker. pp. 268–.







Translation:-




Letter 326/310 Bishops Bartholomew of Exeter and Roger of Worcester to Pope Alexander III



late 1175 - early 1176







Other Jaffé Regesta references







1176







12707 (8440) Monachos S. Augustini Cantuarienses hortatur, ut dejecto Clarembaldo,

alium sibi abbatem sumant. Hist. mon. S. Aug. Cant. p. 413. (Chron. W. Thom ap.

Twysden H. A. SS. H. 1818, Migne 200 p. 1080). "Auditis olim".



12708 (8441) Capitulo S. Augustini Cantuariensi petente, "quidquid Clarembaldus, quon-

dam electus, de bonis ecclesiae absque consilio et assensu totius capituli in ejus

praeiudicium fecerit", rescindit. Hist. mon. S. Aug. Cant. p. 415. (Chron. W. Thom

ap. Twysden H. A. SS. H. 1818, Migne 200 p. 1080). "Nostrae sollicitudinis est".



12709 Capitulo S. Augustini Cantuariensi concedit, "ne quisquam, abbas sive praelatus,

ecclesiae eorum pueros infra XV. annos in monachili habitu suscipiat". Hist. mon.

S. Aug. Cant. p. 427. "Nostrae sollicitudinis est".



12710 Capitulo S. Augustini Cantuariensi petente, domui eorum eleemosynariae asserit

ecclesiam S. Augustini Northbumensem. Hist. mon. S. Aug. Cant. p. 448. "Iustis

petentium desideriis".



12711 Capitulo S. Aug. Cantuariensi petente, ecclesiae eomm "combustae et omnino

fere destructae ad reparationem ipsius ecclesiae" asserit ecclesiam Faureshamensem.

Hist. mon. S. Aug. Cant. p. 429. "Cum ecclesia vestra"



12712 Capitulo S. Augustini Cantuariensi concedit, "ne quisquam, abbas sire praelatus,

ecclesiae eorum segrestaniam (sacristaniam) vel camerariam absque consensu totius

capituli ad firmam dare vel sibi usurpare praesumat". Hist. mon. S. Aug. Cant. p. 426.

"Nostrae sollicitudinis est".







12179 (8377) B(artholomaeo) Exoniensi et R(ogero) Wigomiensi episcopis et (Clarem-



baldo) abbati Faureshamensi mandat, ut monasterium S. Augustini Cantuariense, 





"quod non solum in temporalibus, sed et in spiritualibus ad ultimum venisse de-



fectum videatur", reformare studeant, utque, si cognoverint, quod absque amotione



electi (Clarembaldi) et quorundam monachomm reformari non possit, eos amoveant



aliasque idoneas personas substituant. Liverani Spicil. Liber. p. 546, (Chronica



W. Thom ap. Twysden H. A. SS. IL 1817). "Cum ex suscepti".



J.A. Froude (1877). The Living Age Thomas Becket: Living Age Company. pp. 5–.



























Posted by



at





No comments:
  


















Labels:

















          

        

          

        

Wednesday, 6 February 2013


          

        









Roger of Wendover: Events and Incidents leading up to Constitutions












Roger of Wendover's Account



Extract from

Roger (of Wendover); Matthew Paris; John Allen Giles (1841). Roger
 of Wendover's Flowers of history: Comprising the history of England 
from the descent of the Saxons to A.D. 1235; formerly ascribed to 
Matthew Paris. H. G. Bohn. pp. 295–. 







Roger of Wendover's Flowers of History p. 537





Secunda perturbatio contra Thomam, Cantuariensem archiepiscopum. 



Anno Domini MCLXIII. rex Anglorum Henricus, finibus transmarinis pro voluntate dispositis, in Angliam rediit, et Thomas, Cantuariensis archiepiscopus, illi obviam veniens in osculum receptas est, sed non in gratiae plenitudinem, sicut ipsius regis vultus statim aversus omnibus qui aderant patenter ostendit. Eodem anno, rege Anglorum ad hoc instante et Alexandro papa id concedente, Gilebertus, Herfordensis episcopus, ad sedem ecclesiae Londoniensis translatus est, et quarto kalendas Maii in illa cathedra solemniter introductus. Eodem anno Robertus Muntfort, cum Henrico de Essexia de proditione regis singulari certamine congrediens, victoriam reportavit; qua de causa Henricus notam infamiae simul et exhaereditationis jacturam incurrens, indulgentia pii regis, apud Radingum habitum monachilem suscepit. Hoc etiam anno Thomas, Cantuariensis archiepiscopus, ad instantissimam regis petitionem archidiaconatum Cantuariensem dedit Gaufrido Ridel, clerico suo; sed gratiam regis sibi prius subtractam non plene redintegratam cognovit. Apparuit autem prima regis perturbatio contra Thomam archiepiscopum cum sigillum regi resignavit; secunda, cum regi de partibus transmarinis venienti occurrens receptus est in osculum, et non in gratiae plenitudinem; tertia in hoc loco, cum archidiaconatum ad ejus petitionem contulit, nec tamen gratiam ejus sibi redintegratam cognovit. Eodem anno Clarenbaldus, sancti Augustini electus, benedictionem a Thoma, Cantuariensi archiepiscopo, accipere quaerebat; sed in sua ecclesia et sine processione, spe cujusvis subjectionis adempta. 3Consensit autem rex electo, consuetudines antiquas in regno stare persuadens et Ad. ne3. archiepiscopo praedicta exigenti adversans; et in hoc loco quarto apparuit perturbatio regis contra ipsum. Eodem anno facta est inquisitio generalis per Angliam, cui quis in servitio seculari de jure obnoxius teneretur; inventum est in Cantiae provincia, quod 'Willelmus de Ros in munere quolibet subeundo regem deberet agnoscere et non archiepiscopum, et sic odium personae in damnum ecclesiae redundavit; et hic quinto loco apparuit perturbatio regis contra illum. Sexto apparuit, cum archiepiscopus vacantem ecclesiam de Ainesford cuidam Laurentio contulit; sed Willelmus, villae dominus, sibi jus vendicans patronatus Laurentium expulit, pro quo facto archiepiscopus Willelmum excommunicavit; quod, quia rege minime certiorato fecisset, maximam ejus indignationem incurrit. Asserit enim rex, juxta dignitatem regni sui, quod nullus, qui de rege in capite teneat, vel minister ejus, citra illius conscientiam sit excommunicandus ab aliquo, ne, si hoc regem lateat, lapsus ignorantia communicet excommunicato, comitem vel baronem ad se venientem in osculo vel consilio admittat. Septimo apparuit, cum idem rex nuntios ad curiam Romanam misisset, ut consuetudines regni confirmaret, ubi in aliquo profecisset; nuntii reversi animum regis contra archiepiscopum et alios exasperatum non poterant mitigare.



Quod papa Alexander concilium Turonis congregavit.



Eodem anno papa Alexander Turonis concilium congregavit in ecclesia sancti Mauricii duodecimo kalendas Junii; ad cujus vocationem, permissione regis Angliae, venerunt archiepiscopi, episcopi et alii Angliae praelati, Thomas, Cantuariensis archiepiscopus, cum suis suffraganeis, et ad dexteram papae in concilio sedit, et archiepiscopus Eboracensis Rogerus ad sinistram, cum solo episcopo Dunelmensi. Eodem anno rex Malcolmus Scotorum et Resus princeps Demetiae, id est Australium Wallensium, cum aliis regibus et majoribus Cambriae, kalendis Julii apud Wodestoke fecerunt homagium regi Anglorum et Henrico filio ejus. Ipso etiam anno Rogerus, comes Clarensis, a Thoma, Cantuariensi archiepiscopo, apud Westmonasterium vocatus ad faciendum sibi homagium de castello Tunebregge et pertinentiis ejus, contradixit ei comes instinctu regis, dicens, feodum illud totum in servitio laicali ad regem potius quam ad archiepiscopum pertinere; et hic loco octavo apparuit regis perturbatio adversus archiepiscopum Cantuariensem.



Translation by J.A. Giles

Extract from

Roger (of Wendover); Matthew Paris (1849). Roger
 of Wendover's Flowers of history: Comprising the history of England 
from the descent of the Saxons to A.D. 1235; formerly ascribed to 
Matthew Paris. H. G. Bohn. pp. 537–.





Of the second cause of offence against Thomas, archbishop of Canterbury.



A. D. 1163. Henry king of England, having settled his affairs beyond the sea, returned to England, and Thomas, the archbishop of Canterbury, coming to meet him, was received with the usual kiss, but not into full favour, as was evident to all who were present by the king's turning away from him his face. The same year, at the instance of the king, and with the pope's consent, Gilbert bishop of Hereford was translated to the see of London, and solemnly enthroned in that church on the 28th of April. Also Robert de Montfort vanquished Henry of Essex in a single combat, on a charge of treason to the king: and Henry, who by this defeat rendered himself liable to degradation and forfeiture, was allowed, by the king's indulgence, to take the monastic habit in Reading abbey. This year, also, archbishop Thomas, at the urgent request of the king, made his clerk, Geoffrey Ridel, archdeacon of Canterbury; but he plainly saw that the king's favour was not fully restored to him. The first offence was taken when he resigned the king's seal; the second manifestation of coldness was when the archbishop was received with the kiss as usual, but not into full favour. It now appeared, for the third time, when the archbishop gave the archdeaconry as the king requested, but perceived, at the same time, that the royal favour was not fully restored. The same year Clarenbald, abbat elect of St. Augustine's, endeavoured to obtain the usual benediction from the archbishop, but in his own abbey church, and without a procession, seeking by these means to withdraw himself from subjection to the archbishop. The king consented to these wishes of the abbat-elect, urging that the ancient customs of the kingdom should be preserved, and thus he opposed the archbishop, which was the next occasion of offence taken against him. This year, also, there was a general inquisition into the feudal tenures throughout England; and it was found that in the province of Kent, that William de Roos, in the discharge of a certain service, ought to recognize the king, and not the archbishop as his superior. This personal enmity became detrimental to the church; and this was the fifth occasion of offence with the archbishop. A sixth showed itself, when the archbishop bestowed the vacant church of Eynsford on one Laurence: but William, the lord of the village, claimed the patronage of the church, and expelled Laurence, for which he was excommunicated by the archbishop. This was done without consulting the king, who consequently was much offended at the proceeding; for he claimed as one of his royal dignities, that no tenant in chief or his minister, should be excommunicated without his own privity, lest he might communicate unknowingly with an excommunicated person, either earl or baron, and admit him to the kiss or to his council. A seventh manifestation of the king's anger appeared after he had sent ambassadors to Rome to obtain confirmation of the customs of the kingdom ; and the ambassadors, on their return, could not pacify the king's mind towards either the archbishop or several other persons. 



How pope Alexander convoked a council at Tours. 



The same year pope Alexander convoked a council at Tours, in the church of St. Martin's, on the 21st of May; at which council, by permission of the king of England, were present many English bishops and prelates. Archbishop Thomas, also, was there with his suffragans, and sat at the pope's right hand, whilst Roger, archbishop of York, with the bishop of Durham, sat at his left. The same year, Malcolm king of Scots, and Rees prince of Demetia, i. e., South Wales, with other kings and nobles of Cambria, did homage on the first day of June to king Henry and his son prince Henry, at Woodstock. Moreover, Roger earl ot Clare was summoned to do homage to archbishop Thomas at Westminster, for his castle of Tunbridge and its appurtenances; but, by the king's instigation, he refused, saying that all the fee of that castle was held by lay-service of the king, and not of the archbishop. This was the eighth cause of enmity between the king and the archbishop of Canterbury.









Posted by



at





No comments:
  


















Labels:

















          

        

          

        

Saturday, 2 February 2013


          

        









The Quadrilogus














The Quadrilogus (Historia Quadripartita) [Le Quadrilogue] is a composite narrative comprising the writings of four biographers of Becket.



There are two Quadrilogi



Quadrilogus I (Earlier in 1495)

Thomas [Becket] Cantuariensis (1118-1170)

Vita et Processus sancti Thomae Cantuariensis martyris super libertate ecclesiastica.

Paris: Johann Philippi, 1495.

[Philippi, Jean, de Cruzenach (fl.1494-1512), ed.imp.lib]




Digital copy at:



la colección digital de Fondo Antiguo de la Universitat de València, Spain.

http://trobes.uv.es/tmp/_webpac2_1535177.14261






Quadrilogus II (Later in 1682)

Christianus Lupus (O.E.S.A); Thomas Becket; Alexander paus III (paus); Louis VII (koning van Frankrijk), Henry (koning van Engeland) (1682). Epistolae et vita Divi Thomae Martyris et Archiepiscopi Cantuariensis, nec non epistolae Alexandri III. Pontificis, Galliae Regis Ludovici Septimi, Angliae Regis Henrici II. aliarumque plurium sublimium ex utroque foro personarum .... typis Eug. Henrici Fricx. pp. 4–.



This Quadrilogus or Life of St Thomas was compiled at the command of pope Gregory XI out of four original lives of this saint brought into one; viz. by Herbert the martyr's clerk, William of Canterbury, Alan Abbot of Tewkesbury and John of Salisbury. This Quadrilogus or Quadripartite was printed at Brussels under the care of Lupus [Christian de Wolf] with a large collection of St Thomas' epistles in 1682.







Further References







Frank Barlow (1990). Thomas Becket. University of California Press. pp. 1–. ISBN 978-0-520-07175-9.







Michael Staunton (2006). Thomas Becket and His Biographers. Boydell Press. pp. 5–. ISBN 978-1-84383-271-3.







Saint Thomas (à Becket); Alan (of Tewkesbury); Herbert (of Bosham); Jacques-Paul Migne, Gilbert Foliot (1854). S. Thomæ Cantuariensis Archiepiscopi et martyris nec non Herberti de Boseham clerici ejus a secretis opera omnia. Excudebatur et venit apud J.-P. Migne. pp. 12–.







Materials for the history of Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury, canonized by pope Alexander III, A. D. 1173. Vol. 4 / ed. by James Craigie Robertson. Longman (London) 1875-1885



[Quadrilogus II: Vita S. Thomae, seu Quadrilogus, ed. J. C. Robertson in Materials for the History of Thomas Becket, IV, pp. 266-430.]









Augustin Thierry (1846). OEuvres complètes. Furne. pp. 269–.














The Lyell version of the Quadrilogus life of St Thomas of Canterbury



DUGGAN A. J.



Analecta Bollandiana



1994, vol. 112, no 1-2, pp. 105-138.




Anne Duggan (2007). Thomas Becket: Friends, Networks, Texts and Cult. Ashgate/Variorum. ISBN 978-0-7546-5922-8.



Variorum Collected Studies Series: CS877



Chapter XV



The Lyell Version of the Quadrilogus Life of St. Thomas of Canterbury









https://archive.org/stream/Thomassagaerkiby000390918v0ThomReyk/Thomassagaerkiby000390918v0ThomReyk_orig#page/n7/mode/1up



Parker Library Ms 446, Corpus Christi College Library, Cambridge University



Title: Elias of Evesham OSB, Quadrilogus de uita Sancti Thomae Cantuariensis 






Thomas Saga based on Quadrilogus 







Thomas saga erkibyskups Carl Richard Unger  (1869)  - http://bit.ly/21UNyAF









Middle English Translation (?)



The following is said to be a loose Middle English translation of the Quadrilogus by Elias of Evesham









The Early South-English Legendary, Or, Lives of Saints 



by Carl Horstmann , Bodleian Library








Another Composite Work or Cento: Thomas de Froidmont





A much later life of Becket was written by another Cistercian monk, Thomas of Froidmont.. Appears in Anecdota Bedæ, Lanfranci, et aliorum, ed. J. A. Giles (London: Caxton Society, 1844)







To be found as:- 




J.A. Giles, ed. (1851). Anecdota Bedæ, Lanfranci, et aliorum. 46: Philippo Leodiensi - Vita Sancti Thomae: D. Nutt. pp. 207–.
















van der Straeten Joseph. Paul Gerhard Schmidt, éd. trad. — Thomas von Froidmont : Die Vita des Heiligen Thomas Becket, Erzbischof von Canterbury, 1991, Cahiers de civilisation médiévale, 1993, vol. 36, n° 143, p. 326.








Thomas von Froidmont: Die Vita des Heiligen Thomas Becket, Erzbischof von Canterbury by Paul Gerhard Schmidt



Anne J. Duggan



The English Historical Review



Vol. 110, No. 437 (Jun., 1995), p. 697





Thomas de Froidmont [Thomas of Beverley] and German translation:- 



Paul Gerhard Schmidt (1989). Thomas von Froidmont. F. Steiner Verlag Wiesbaden. ISBN 978-3-515-05465-2.









Saint Thomas Becket



Ses Historiens, Son Culte Sa Naissance, Son Passage, Ses Parents Dans Le Beauvaisis





 




















Posted by



at





No comments:
  


















Labels:

























Roger of Wendover's version of the Constitutions: J.A. Giles Translation

















How a recognition of the customs of England was made at Clarendon. 

A.D. 1164. In the presence of king Henry, at Clarendon, 
on the 25th of January, John of Oxford, according to the 
king's request, presiding, in the presence, also, of the arch- 
bishops, bishops, abbats, priors, earls, barons, and nobles of 
the kingdom, was made a recognition or inquisition, con- 
cerning certain customs and liberties of the king's predecessors, 
to wit, Henry, his grandfather, and others, which ought to 
be observed and held by all in the kingdom, on account of 
the dissensions and discords which often arise between the 
clergy and justices of our lord the king and the nobles of 
the kingdom. Of these customs then recognised a portion is 
contained in the sixteen chapters here following. 

I, Of the advowson and presentation to churches : if any dispute shall 
arise between laics, or between clerks and laics, or between clerks, let it be 
tried and decided in the court of our lord the king. 

II. Churches of the king's fee shall not be given in perpetuity without 
his consent and licence. 

III. Clerks accused of any crime, shall be summoned by the king's 
justice into the king's court, to answer there for whatever the king's court 
shall determine they ought to answer there, and in the ecclesiastical court, 
for whatever it shall be determined that they ought to answer there ; yet 
so that the king's justice shall send into the court of holy church to see 
in what way the matter shall there be handled; and if the clerk shall 
confess or be convicted, the church for the future shall not protect him. 

IV. No archbishop, bishop, or other exalted person, shall leave the 
kingdom without the king's licence; and if they wish to leave it, the king 
shall be empowered, if he pleases, to take security from them, that they 
will do no harm to the king or kingdom, either in going, or remaining, or 
in returning, 

V. Persons excommunicated are not to give bail, ad remanens, 
nor to make oath, but only to give bail and pledge that they will stand by 
the judgment of the church where they are absolved. 

VI. Laics shall not be accused, save by certain legal accusers and 
witnesses in presence of the bishop, so that the archdeacon may not lose 
his rights, or anything which accrues to him therefrom. And if those 
who are arraigned are such as no one is willing or dares to accuse them, the 
sheriff on demand from the bishop shall cause twelve loyal men of the 
village to swear before the bishop that they will declare the truth in that 
matter according to their conscience. 

VII. No one who holds of the king in chief, nor any of his domestic 
servants, shall be excommunicated, nor their lands be put under an interdict, 
until the king shall be consulted, if he is in the kingdom; or, if he is abroad, 
his justiciary ; that he may do what is right in that matter ; and so that 
whatever belongs to the king's court may therein be settled, and the s mie 
on the other hand of the ecclesiastical court. 

VIII. Appeals, if they arise, must be made from the archdeacon to the 
bishop, and from the bishop to the archbishop ; and if the archbishop shall 
fail in administering justice, the parties shall come before oiu- lord the king, 
that by his precept the controversy may be terminated in the archbishop's 
court, so that it may not proceed further without the consent of our lord 
the king. 

IX. If a dispute shall arise between a clerk and a laic, or between a 
laic and a clerk, about a tenement, which the clerk wishes to claim as ele- 
emosynary, but the laic claims as lay fee, it shall be settled by the declara- 
tion of twelve loyal men, through the agency of the king's capital justice, 
whether the tenement is eleemosynary or lay fee, in presence of the king's 
justice. And if it shall be declared that it is eleemosynary, it shall be 
pleaded in the ecclesiastical court ; but if a lay-fee, unless both shall claim 
the tenement of the same bishop or baron, it shall be pleaded in the king's 
court; but if both shall claim of that fee from the same bishop or baron, 
it shall be pleaded in his court, yet so that the declaration above-named 
shall not deprive of seizing him who before was seized, until he shall be di- 
vested by the pleadings. 

X. If any man lielonging to a city, castle, borough, or king's royal manor, 
shall he summoned by the archdeacon or bishop to answer for a crime, and 
shall not comply with the summons, it shall be lawful to place him under 
an interdict, but not to excommunicate him, until the king's principal 
officer of that place be informed thereof that he may justify his appearing 
to the summons ; and if the king's officer shall fail in that matter, he shall 
be at the king's mercy, and the bishop shall forthwith coerce the party ac- 
cused with ecclesiastical discipline. 

XI. The archbishops, bishops, and all other persons of the kingdom who 
hold of the king in chief, shall hold their possessions of the king as barony, 
and answer for the same to the king's justices and officers, and follow and 
observe all the king's customs and rectitudes, like other barons, until the 
judgment is carried to the loss of members or death. 

XII. When an archbishopric, bishopric, abbacy, or priory of the king's 
domain shall be vacant, it shall be in his hand, and he shall receive from it 
all the revenues and proceeds, as of domain. And when the time shall 
come for providing for that church, our lord the king shall recommend the 
best persons to that church, and the election shall be made in the king's 
chapel, with the king's consent, and the advice of the person of the king- 
dom whom he shall have summoned for that purpose. And the person 
elected shall there do homage and fealty to our lord the king, as to his liege 
lord, of life and limb, and of his earthly honours saving his orders before 
he is consecrated. 

XIII. If any of the king's nobles shall have refused to render justice to 
an archbishop, or bishop, or archdeacon, for himself or any of his men, our 
lord the king shall justise them. And if by chance any one shall have 
deforced our lord the king of his rights, the archbishops, bishops, or arch- 
deacons shall justise him that he may render satisfaction to the king. 

XIV. The cattle of those who are in forfeiture to the king shall not be 
detained by the church or the cemetery, in oppositi(m to the king's justice ; 
for they belong to the king, whether they are found in the church or with- 
out. 

XV. Pleas for debts which are due, whether with the interposition of a 
pledge of faith or not, belong to the king's couit. 

XVI. The sons of rustics shall not be ordained without the consent of 
their lord, in whose land they are known to have been born. 

This recognition or inquisition concerning bad customs, 
liberties, and dignities detestable to Almighty God, was 
sworn to by the archbishop, bishops, abbats, priors, and 
clergy, besides all the earls, barons, and nobles, who expressly 
promised, by word of mouth, and in the words of truth, that 
they would keep and observe them to our lord the king and 
his heirs, in good faith and without mental reservation, for 
ever.











Latin Original




Roger, of Wendover; Paris, Matthew; ed. Henry Octavius Coxe.
Rogeri de Wendover Chronica; (1841) Volume II. pp 298-302.
http://archive.org/stream/rogeridewendover02roge#page/298/mode/2up



Rogeri De Wendover (1841). Henricus O. Coxe,. ed. Rogeri De Wendover Chronica, Sive Flores Historiarum Nunc Primum Edidit Henricus O. Coxe,. Volume II. pp. 298–301.



















Posted by



at





No comments:
  


















Labels:

















          

        

          

        

Saturday, 26 January 2013


          

        









The case of Philip de Brois , about July 1163
















The most infamous case concerning a Criminous Clerk, was that of Philip de Brois. Relations between Becket and king Henry II came to a crisis over this matter. This matter occurred in or around July 1163, at a time when Henry and Becket were both in London. 







Simon Fitz-Peter, one of the king's justices in eyre (circuit judge) in Bedfordshire, complained that he had been insolently treated by a cleric, called Philip de Brois.  The latter had been accused of the murder of a knight, tried in the court of the bishop of Lincoln and acquitted. But one of the king's officers, wishing, from an old grudge he bore him, that the cleric should be ruined, brought up the charge again and insisted that it should be heard in the lay or king's court. Philip de Brois refused to be tried again on the grounds that he was a cleric, and poured abuse upon the justice. The justice formally complained about the abuse he had been given to the king. 





The various different chroniclers each give a very different account of the story this case. In summary we can state the following. King Henry insisted that the man should be tried again for the murder, and anew for his insulting language. Becket claimed the trial for his own court at Canterbury, and there the accusation, which had already been heard and judged, was, of course, dismissed; while for the abuse a sentence of scourging was given, together with a heavy pecuniary punishment. King Henry was dissatisfied with this sentence and declared that the bishops who had judged the case had had more respect for the archbishop than for him. "By God's eyes," he said, "you shall make oath to me that you gave a just judgment and spared the man not because he was a clerk."



















William FitzStephen's account





Item, erant regis justitiarii itinerantes aliquando apud Dunstapulam : orta est aliqua altercatio inter Simonem filium Petri et quendam canonicum Bedefordiae Philippum de Brois. Questus est postea Simon regi, quod eum Philippus, in obsequio ipsius et magna audientia, turpiloquio inhonorasset. Coram archiepiscopo Philippus super hoc a rege redargutus, cum negare non posset, respondit, se convitiis provocatum calore iracundiae dixisse, non animi judicio. Exegit rex judicium. Clerus ad regem mitigandum decrevit, per annum beneficio praebendae suae simul et regni inhabitatione Philippum privandum. Ita factum est : nec tamen regi satisfactum est.







Also, at one time there were some the king's itinerant justices at Dunstable. an altercation broke out between [one of them] Simon fitzPeter and a canon of Bedford, Philip de Brois. Simon later complained to the king that whilst in the king's service, and in front of a large audience, Philip had dishonoured him using foul language. In the presence of the Archbishop Philip contradicted the king,  but when he could not deny it, he answered that he had been provoked by the heat of anger, and spoken without the judgement of the mind. The king demanded justice [retrial]. The clergy in order to please the king decreed that Philip should lose his benefice [prebend] for one year and likewise be deprived of his habitation.  So it was done: however the king was not satisfied.









Roger de Potigny's [Anonymous I's] account













Nec multo post tempore facta est iterim inter eos contentio vehemens, pro quodam canonico nomine Philippo de Broc; qui super interfectione cujusdam militis a quibusdam fuerat impetitus. Is enim quum coram episcopo suo super objecto sibi homicidio sufficienter respondisset ; et deficientibus in causa adversariis ; ipse ad innocentiam suam certius comprobandam se sacramento purgasset : iterum eum in causam revocare nitebatur quidam Simon, filius Petri, quem rex in partibus Pedefordiae, ubi idem Philippus morabatur, judicem constituerat. Philippus autem de causa jam finita et ordine judiciario terminato iterum respondere noluit : praesertim ante laicam justitiam : quinimo ipsum Simonem pertinacius instantem cum indignatione a se repulit, multis eum afficiens convitiis et contumeliis. Rege itaque apud Londonias constituto ; accessit ad eum memoratus Simon, retulitque ei omnia qum sibi Philippus intulerat.  Quibus auditis rex in furiam versus, solito suo more per oculos Dei terribiliter jurabat ; sic se habere convitia illa militi suo illata, ac si sibi ipsi intulisset Philippus: quapropter absque mora eum judicari praecepit. 







Archiepiscopus autem quum praesens esset, et haec audiret. "Nequaquam," ait, "ita fiet nam clericorum judices laici esse non possunt. Quicquid autem iste vel alius quilibet de clero excesserit, in ecclesiastica debet emendari curia. Quapropter quicquid est illud quo rex laesum se queritur, vel miles ejus, Cantuariam veniat vel mittat, indeque plenam justitiam ex ecclesiastica auctoritate reportabit.  Rex vero vehementer irascens et multa dicens, tandem licet invitus quosdam episcopos et proceres ad diem sibi ab archiepiscopo constitutam Cantuariam transmisit, qui quum venissent, Philippum de veteri querela homicidii instanter impetebant. Quumque causam ecclesiastico judicio terminatam iterari non debere judicatum fuisset, ventum est tandem ad contumelias regio militi illatas. 







Quod cum Philippus minime inficiari dignaretur, (erat namque vir magnus et de magno genere,) adversarii ejus prosilientes in medium, "Judicium," inquiunt, "de evidenti et non negata injuria postulamus."  Et cum Philippus se ad spontaneam satisfactionem offerret, nihilominus tamen eum judicari oportuit. Diffinitum est igitur, ut Philippus per biennium praebendam suam in manu regis admitteret, et rex iterum de reditibus ejus quod vellet faceret; ipse vero ante militem, nudum se, secundum morem patrim satisfacturus, offerret. Revertentibus autem qui missi fuerant et quod gestum erat conferentibus; rex honorem suum laesum que abjudicatum esse respondit. Episcopi vero cum se juste judicasse dixissent excepto quod Philippum ultra quam meruisset, pro pace et honore regis gravassent, rex magis inardescens, "Per oculos," ait, "Dei, vos ipsi mihi jurabitis, quod verum expresseritis judicium." Sed nimis longum erit, si per singula prosequi voluerimus, qum vel a rege improbe vel ab archiepiscopo constanter dicta seu facta sunt : quapropter iis omissis, ad communem ecclesiae causam accedamus.











Not a long time after this [the Council of Woodstock, 1163] it came to pass again that another violent struggle arose between them, over a certain canon by the name of Philip de Broc, who had been accused by some of the killing of a certain knight. Philip had already sufficiently answered the case of the murder before the bishop; and that the cause of his adversaries had been deficient, further he had himself proved his innocence with a greater certainty, by the sacrament of purging his soul. However a certain Simon fitzPeter, whom the king had appointed as judge in the district of Bedford, in the same district where Philip resided, tried to have the case recalled, and for Phillip to face the charge again. Phillip, however, answered that he was unwilling to respond to the case for a second time as it had already been concluded, and that all judicial matters had been determined, and especially he refused to appear before a lay justice.  But further, at the same time that he persistently rejected this, this same Simon was confronted with Philips anger, and distressing insults, and the many abuses that were hurled at him.


The King was in London and Simon approached him. He mentioned and referred the king to everything that this Phillip had said and done. Upon hearing this the king flew into a fury, and in his usual fashion he most  terribly did swear "by the eyes of God"; anyone whom had abused a knight of his was to be treated as if they had insulted him personally, such as that which this Philip had done, wherefore he ordered him to be held and judged without delay.







However, the archbishop, who was also present, heard this . "By no means," he said "can clerics be brought before lay judges. Whatever, whether this case or that, for which any cleric might have been accused, this must be in an ecclesiastical court corrected. Therefore, for whatever reason about that which the king complains of or has been offended by, or his knights, let him come or be sent to Canterbury, and there answer before the full justice of the ecclesiastical authority."







The king truly became exceedingly angry, and after saying much, at last reluctantly allowed that some bishops and noblemen to be sent to Canterbury, where on the day appointed by the archbishop,  after they had arrived, they were urgently to deal with the prior charge of the murder committed by Philip. But as soon as it was concluded that the case must not be adjudged a second time by ecclesiastical justices, they came finally to the case of the insults brought by the royal knight. But since Philip deigned little enough to deny this, (inasmuch as he was an important man and a descendant from an important family,) his adversaries jumped up in the middle of the proceedings declaring, "We demand justice based on the evidence and undenied injury that has been done." But since Philip was offering himself for a voluntary penalty, likewise how yet he ought to be judged. It was therefore held, that for two years Philip's prebend was to be delivered into the hands of the king, for to the king to receive all the income he might make from this; and that then truly before the knight [he had insulted], he was to bare himself, according to the custom of the land, so that he may offer satisfaction. However, the outcome which had been sent back and which the decision had been reached in conference, the king replied that his honour had been injured, and he rejected it. The bishops truly said they had rightly judged, except that beyond that which Philip had deserved, for the peace and honour of the king they had made worse, the king greatly glowed, "by the eyes of God, " he said, "you will swear to me that you have pronounced truth in this judgement." But it would take a very long time if we were to follow through all that was said, either that which was shamelessly uttered by the king, or that which came firmly from the archbishop: wherefore with these matters laid aside, we can now come to the common cause of the Church [and the dealings which took place at the  Council of Clarendon, January 1164].





Roger of Wendover's account









Extracted from










The Clergy subjected to lay jurisdiction.



Quod rex decrevit, ut a laicis clerici punirentur. 







Eodem anno rex Henricus volens in singulis, ut dicebat, maleficia debita cum severitate punire, et cujuscumque ordinis dignitatem ad quum trahi dispendium, incongruum esse asseruit, clericos a suis justiciariis in publico flagitio deprehensos episcopo loci tradere impunitos decrevit enim, ut quos episcopi invenirent obnoxios, praesente regis justiciario, exauctorarent, et post curiae regis traderent puniendos. In contrarium sentiebat archiepiscopus, ut quos exauctorent episcopi a manu laicali postmodum non punirentur, quia bis in id ipsum puniri viderentur. Huic controversiae praestitit occasionem Philippus de Broc, canonicus Bedefordensis, qui, tractus in causam propter homicidium in regis justiciarium verbum protulit contumeliosum ; quod cum negare coram archiepiscopo non posset, praebendum suae beneficio multatus est et per biennium a regno pulsus ; et hic nono loco apparuit perturbatio regis contra archiepiscopum.







Notes 



This chapter taken verbatim from Diceto, col. 536.

De Broc is  de Brois in Stephan. p. 32, and Quadrilog. p. 32. 













Translation by J.A. Giles







Extracted from






How the king decreed that the clergy should receive punishment from the laity. 







The same year king Henry, wishing always, as he asserted, to punish crimes with due severity, and that the dignity of all orders should be treated fairly, asserted it was un-reasonable that his justices should be obliged to hand over clerks, when convicted of crimes, to the bishop of the diocese, without punishment ; and he ordered that all clerks whom their bishops found guilty, should be deprived of their orders, in presence of the king's justiciary, and afterwards be delivered over for punishment to the king's court. The archbishop maintained the opposite opinion, that none, who were deprived of their order for a crime by their bishop, should receive any further punishment from a lay tribunal, which would look like inflicting a double punishment for a single offence. This controversy owed its origin to Philip de Broc, canon of Bedford, who, when arraigned on a charge of murder, used contumelious language towards the judge. This he was unable to deny when he was had up before the archbishop, wherefore he was deprived of his prebend, and banished the kingdom for two years. This was the ninth cause of bad feeling between the king and the archbishop.







To this Matthew Paris adds: —" Pope Octavian died, and the emperor Frederic substituted another in his place. Reading abbey was dedicated this year by the archbishop, in presence of the king and the bishops." 



















Ralph de Diceto's description







Rex Anglorum volens in singulis, ut dicebat, maleficia debita cum severitate punire, et ordinis dignitatem ad iniquum trahi compendium incongruum esse considerans, clericos a suis judiciariis in publico flagitio deprehensos episcopo loci reddendos decrevat ut quos episcopus inveniret obnoxios, praesente justiciario regis exauctoret, et curiae traderet puniendos. In contrarium sentiebant episcopi, quos enim exauctorarent a manu laicali contendebant protegere, alioquin bis judicaretur in idipsum. Huic controversiae praestitit occasionem Philippus de Broc, canonicus de Bedeford, qui tractus in causam propter homicidium, in justiciarium regis verbum protulit contumeliosum. Quod cum coram archiepiscopo negare non posset, praebendae suae multatus est beneficio, pultus est a regno per biennium.







The King of the English in particular wanted, as he was saying, that crimes should be punished with all due severity. Regardless of dignity or rank he considered that for a more consistent and just outcome, clerics seized by his own justices in public disgrace should be rendered to the bishop of the district to be judged, and if the bishop determines they were guilty and  having been degraded, they should then be presented before the King's justice and delivered to his court for punishment. The bishops felt quite the opposite; they contended that those indeed who had been degraded, should be protected from the hand of lay justice, otherwise it would seem as if they had been judged twice for the same crime.









This controversy became apparent on the occasion of Philip de Broc, canon of Bedford, who, when he had been dragged into a case concerning murder, had proferred profanities in front of the king's justiciar.  And when he was not be able to deny this, in the presence of the archbishop, he was deprived of the benefit of his prebend as punishment, and banished from the kingdom for two years.













Edward Grim's account







Selden Society (1991). English lawsuits from William I to Richard I. Selden Society. p. 100.







Great Britain. Public Record Office (1965). Rerum Britannicarum Medii Ævi Scriptores: Or, Chronicles and Memorials of Great Britain and Ireland During the Middle Ages. Issue 67, Volume 2. pp. 374–6.
















DE NOVO NOCENDI GENERE ARCHIEPISCOPO.





Novo autem praemeditato nocendi genere subintroducitur contra derieum Philippum de Broii nomine ab olim consopita calumnia, siquidem de morte militis cujusdam fuerat appellatus, sed in audientia Lincolniensis episcopi quum ventilata fuisset causa, ecclesiastico jure purgatur, et soluta controversia liber a parentibus clamatus est. Rursum vero minister regis, ad cujus providentiam illud pertinebat negotium, volens clericum deperire ex antiquo odio, causam revocavit in medium, et calumniam reiteravit. Clericus autem ut vir ingenuus, dolore tactus et indignatione, convitiis vicecomitem aggressus est, qui quum regi detulisset illatam sibi u clerico contumeliam, gavisus, ut creditur, rex accepta occasione saeviendi in clericum, conceptam commotionem refudit in Philippum. Et facta quaestione de clerico in praesentia archiepiscopi, protestatur rex, quod plenaria fiet justitia et de homicidio pariter et de convitio, nec stabit penitus solutio facta. Archiepiscopus vero infra curiam suam et tuitionem ecclesiae clericum recepit, ut ibi pro se loquatur, et respondent calumnianti. Missis igitur a rege episcopis aliisque ordinis utriusque, qui clericum judicarent, negat ille homicidium, asserens non debere cogi ulterius super eo responsum reddere, nec haberi in legibus causam revocari in medium, quam purgatio solemnis terminarat, et pax inita cum adversariis sepelivit :







"Quod autem regis ministrum dehonestavi, animi victus amaritudine, fateor, inqiiit, sed plenam pro maledicto polliceor emenditionem, tantum rationis metas correptio non excedat. Et nos, inquiunt, decernimus ut biennio maneat sub manu regis praebenda tua, et possessiones, omniaque quae in reditibus habes ad nutum ipsius eroganda pauperibus."







Adjungunt adhuc nuntii, quod nudus astaret ministro regis, laicali more, et ipsi offerret arma pro injuria, et in illius viveret subjectione.







http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k503197/f439.image

http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k503197/f440.image











Hutton's translation



Extract from



William Holden Hutton (1899). S. Thomas of Canterbury. D. Nutt. pp. 35–6







1163. The case of Philip de Brois.







Edw. Grim. Materials ii., p. 374.







A new method of attacking a clerk, Philip of Brois by name, was resorted to by the resuscitation of a charge that had long been forgotten. He had been accused of the murder of a certain knight, but when the case had been heard in the audience of the bishop of Lincoln he was acquitted by ecclesiastical law, and, the matter ended, he was claimed as free by his kinsfolk. Later on, however, one of the king's officers to whom that duty belonged, wishing, from an ancient grudge he bore him, that the clerk should be ruined, brought forward the case again and repeated the charge of murder. But the clerk, being a man of high birth, overwhelmed with grief and indignation, attacked the sheriff with abuse. The sheriff reported this contumelious language to the king, who, glad (as it was thought) to have an occasion of venting his spleen on a clerk, poured upon Philip the wrath that he had conceived. When the question was raised about the clerk in the presence of the archbishop, the king protested that full justice should be done both about the homicide and about the insult, and that the acquittal would not stand. But the archbishop received the clerk into his court under protection of the Church that he might there answer for himself and reply to the charge. Bishops and others of either order were accordingly sent by the king to judge the clerk. He denied the charge of homicide, asserting that he ought not to be compelled to make any further answer to it, and that there was no legal right to try a case over again, a case which had been ended by the solemn purgation and which the peace he had made with his opponents had buried. 







"I confess," he said, "that in the bitterness of my heart I have abused the king's officer, but I promise a full amendment for my misdeeds ; yet let not the correction exceed the bounds of reason." 







"And we decree," said they, "that your prebend remain under the king's hand for two years, and your possessions and all your incomings to be distributed at his will and pleasure to the poor." 







They added that he was to stand naked before the king's official, just as a layman might, and offer him his arms for the injury he had done him and live in subjection to him.. The clerk submitted to the judgment, glad to have escaped the sentence of death which the king threatened. The king, on the other hand, wishing to condemn the man to death, contended that an injury had been done to himself and to the prejudice of his court. He exclaimed that the bishops had had respect of the person because of the archbishop, and had not judged according to equity, and he added,







 "By the eyes of God, you shall swear to me that you judged a just judgment and did not spare the man because he was a clerk." 







[This, says Grim, led up immediately to the Council of Westminster.]











Herbert of Bosham's Account



Extract from









Herbert (of Bosham) (1845). Herberti de Boseham S. Thomæ Cantuariensis clerici a secretis opera quæ extant omnia. Apud J.H. Parker. pp. 100–. 







17. DE INITIO DISSENSIONIS INTER BEGEM ET ARCHIPRAESULEM 



...



Illud etiam minime praetereundem quod circa idem tempus Philippus quidam, cognomento de Brois, in sede episcopali Lincolniensi canonicus, justitias regis, quae vulgo errantes in terra dicuntur, probrosis quibusdam affecerat contumeliis. Propter quod rex non solum adversus ipsum sed potius adversus totum regni clerum exasperatus videbatur. Solet quippe mox in totam cujusvis officii professionem conferri si quid forte turpiter vel enormiter ab aliquibus de professione admittatur. Sed revera irae seu invidiae sicut citum nimis et inconsideratum judicium hoc, tanquam si in aliqua vel exigua corporis particula macula reperta fuerit et ob id mox totum corpus naevorum sorde judicetur respersum. Et in contumeliis illis et probris constat quidem clericum deliquisse non modicum, verum querela ad archipraesulem delata, citatus clericus etiam supra modum delicti ut vel sic regis facilius quiesceret indignatio, punitus est: publica virgarum disciplina clerico adjudicats et ipso per annos, quot tamen non recordor, ab omni ecclesiastico beneficio quod in regno habebat suspenso, verum regi irato necdum etiam plene pro irati voto satisfactum in hoc. Istud enim est quartum illud quod inter alia emimerat sapiens, quod donec penitus extinguatur, videlicet irae ignis, nunquam dicit sufficit, verum quum regi non sufficeret hoc, videbatur rex potius reum clericum ad aliquam pœnam corporalem deposcere, sed verebatur hoc exprimere, jam advertens archipraesulis rigorem non posse flecti ad hoc. Arctabatur itaque rex, arctabatur et pontifex. Rex etenim populi sui pacem, sicut archipraesul cleri sui zelans libertatem, audiens sic et videns et ad multorum relationes et querimonias accipiens per hujuscemodi castigationes talium clericorum, immo verius caracterizatorum demonum, flagitia non reprimi, sed potius in dies per regnum deterius fieri, archipraesulem el comprovinciales pontifices et reliquum regni clerum Londoniae apud Westmunstier celebriter convocat.



...







It should also be by no means passed over the fact that around about the same time a certain Philip, whose surname was de Brois, a canon in the episcopal see of Lincoln, had hurled some scandalous insults at some justices of the king, those whom are called in the common parlance, men who err in the land [Justices in Eyre]. As a result of this, the king was seen as becoming exasperated, not only at this, but rather at all the clergy in the kingdom. It is obvious and common that if a hugely shameful act is admitted by any member of a profession, that the blame for it is soon conferred upon the whole of that profession. But indeed, out of either anger or jealousy, by the very speediness and thoughtlessness of this judgment, it seemed as though that because on some small part of the body a small blemish was found, that that whole body was adjudged to be covered with filthy moles.  But it was a result of these reproaches and insults it was. indeed, evident that this cleric had greatly transgressed, so the complaint was referred to the Archbishop to judge the truth of the case. He summoned the clerk so that king might rest more easily and also that the above offense could be punished more suitably for the indignation and the degree of the crime: the cleric was sentenced to be publicly beaten with staves, the same punishment to be repeated every year (however I do not remember for how many), and he was to lose all of the ecclesiastical benefices which he held in the kingdom. But even this was truly not enough to satisfy the king in this matter. And this indeed was counted the fourth time among others, that the fire of anger, which, until it has been completely extinguished,  the wise say  "never saith it is enough." But when this was not enough for the king, it seemed preferable to him to ask for the cleric to receive some further corporal punishment,  but he was afraid to articulate this, already noting that he was not able to bend the rigidity of the Archbishop on this matter.  The king therefore became defensive and the archbishop became defensive too. Just as the king wanted peace for his people, so the archbishop was zealous for the liberty of his church.  But hearing and seeing so many reports and complaints received and the castigations throughout the kingdom for unchecked crimes committed by such clerics who could only be more accurately described as devils, this seemed daily to become worse.  The archbishop together with the co-bishops of his province and the remainder of his clergy therefore repaired to London to attend the celebrations which he had convoked at Westminster.

















Extract From










c. July [1163]. The King and Becket are in London.

Simon fitz Peter, a Justiciar recently in Eyre in Bedfordshire, complained to the King of having been insulted in Court at Dunstable, by one Philip de Broc (or Brois), a Canon of Lincoln, whom having been acquitted of homicide by the Court Spiritual of the Diocese, the Justiciar had attempted to re-arraign, and had been resisted with insolence.

The King now insisted on a new Trial, while Becket carried the point that such new Trial should be in Court Spiritual. (De Broc was soon after tried at Canterbury by such a Court. He was acquitted of homicide, but heavily sentenced for contempt of a King's Officer).

S.T.C. Fitz Stephen, i. 214, Potigny, i. 114, Grim. i. 22. Boseham, vii. 101.


















References and Sources















William Holden Hutton (1899). S. Thomas of Canterbury. pp.35-6 D. Nutt.



http://archive.org/details/sthomascanterbu02huttgoog



John Morris (1859). The life and martyrdom of saint Thomas Becket archb. of Canterbury. Longman, Brown. pp. 91–.



James J. Spigelman (1 June 2004). Becket & Henry: The Becket Lectures. James Spigelman. pp. 106–8. ISBN 978-0-646-43477-3.



Michael Staunton (7 December 2001). The Lives of Thomas Becket. Manchester University Press. pp. 77–. ISBN 978-0-7190-5455-6. 



Michael Staunton (2006). Thomas Becket and His Biographers. Boydell Press. pp. 99–. ISBN 978-1-84383-271-3. 



John Lingard; Prudence-Guillaume Roujoux (1825). Histoire d'Angleterre, depuis la première invasion des Romains. Carié De La Charie. pp. 344–. 







Edward Grim. Materials ii p. 374



http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k503197/f439.image

Saint Thomas (à Becket) (1845). "Edwardo Grim: Vita Sancti Thomae". In J.A. Giles. Opera. Parker. pp. 22–.





Guernes (de Pont-Sainte-Maxence) (1859). La vie de saint Thomas le martyr: archevêque de Canterbury. C. A. Aubry. pp. 30–. 











Simon (Dunelmensis); Roger Twysden (1652). "Radolfo de Diceto: Ymagines Historiarum". Historiae Anglicanae scriptores decem. Bee. p. 537.












Baron George Lyttelton Lyttelton (1769). The history of the life of King Henry the Second: and of the age in which he lived. Printed for J. Dodsley. pp. 369–.







The Publications of the Selden Society. Selden Society. 1990. 







Saint Thomas (à Becket) (1845). Opera. Parker. pp. 22–.











William Fitzstephen. Materials iii p.45








Saint Thomas (à Becket) (1845). "Willelmo Filio Stephani: Vita Sancti Thomae". In J.A. Giles. Opera. Parker. pp. 214–.







Anonymous I. Materials iv, p. 24-5




Saint Thomas (à Becket) (1845). "Rogerio De Pontiniaco: Vita Sancti Thomae". In J.A. Giles. Opera. Parker. pp. 114–. 



of Bosham Herbert; John Allen Giles (1846). Herberti de Boseham S. Thomæ Cantuariensis clerici a secretis opera quæ extant omnia: Liber melorum, epistolæ, &c. apud J.H. Parker. pp. 101–. 









Carl Rikard Unger (1869). Thomas saga Erkibyskups. B.M. Bentzen. pp. 57–.



Matthaeus (Parisiensis) (1606). Historia maior. pp. 98–.
William of Newburgh (6 August 2015). The History of English Affairs. Chapter XXVI: Of the king's displeasure against Thomas Becket, archbishop of Canterbury : Lulu.com. pp. 93–. ISBN 978-1-329-42963-5.









Frederic William Maitland (1911); ed. Herbert Albert Laurens Fisher, Frederic William Maitland. The Collected Papers of Frederic William Maitland; Downing Professor of the Laws of England. CUP Archive. pp. 237–. GGKEY:4SE7FBBDXUP. 



















Posted by



at





No comments:
  


















Labels:

















        

      









Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)